NOTES ON TWO CASES OF URETERAL ABNORMALITY. George Blumer, M. D., Assistant in Pathology, Johns Hopkins University. [From the Pathological Laboratory of the Johns Hopkins University and Hospital.] [From The Johns Hopkins Hospital Bulletin, Nos. 66-6?, September-October, 1896.] [From The Johns Hopkins Hospital Bulletin, Nos. 66-67, Septembcr-October, 1896.] NOTES ON TWO CASES OF URETERAL ABNORMALITY. George Blumer, M. D., Assistant in Pathology, Johns Hopkins University, [Prom the Pathological Laboratory of the Johns Hopkins University and Hospital .] The following two cases of ureteral anomaly, which have recently come under observation, seem uncommon enough to merit description. Through the kindness of Dr. Kelly we are enabled to supplement the descriptions by plates. The clinical histories of the cases have no special bearing upon the pathological findings, with the exception of the fact that in case No. 1 an attack of acute cystitis had occurred some five years before death; the notes are therefore confined to the pathological aspects of the cases. Case I. —Anatomical Diagnosis. Diphtheritic inflammation of the bladder, left ureter, and left renal pelvis; suppurative nephritis and perinephritis of the left kidney; hydro-ureter and hydro-nephrosis of the right kidney; miliary abscesses in theright kidney; prolapse of the ureteral and bladder mucous membrane into the bladder cavity; localized fibrinous peri- tonitis ; acute bronchitis; fatty degeneration and cloudy swelling of the liver; slight general arterio-sclerosis. The following is the abstract from the autopsy protocol referring to the ureters and bladder : The right ureter is dilated to the size of a lead pencil, and contains pale, cloudy urine. The walls are thin. The mucous membrane is congested. There is nowhere any constriction until the bladder is reached. The left ureter is dilated to about the size of the normal ileum, its walls are markedly thickened, and it contains a thick greenish black purulent material with an offensive odor. The mucous membrane has a dirty, sloughy appearance and a green-black color, its surface shows numerous irregularities in the form of patches of grayish white false membrane forma- tion, the membrane bejng..fir.mly- -attached -to the' 'snbjacent tissue. 2 The bladder is somewhat enlarged and contains turbid, foul- smelling urine. Its walls are greatly thickened, measuring as much as three centimeters in their thickest part. The mucous membrane is corrugated and of a greenish black color, and shows numerous areas of densely adherent grayish false mem- brane similar to those seen in the ureter. Projecting into the bladder from a point where the left ureteral orifice is normally present is a pyramidal sac, tense and fluctuating, and evi- dently containing fluid. This sac hangs free in the cavity of the bladder and reaches from its place of origin nearly to the internal urethral orifice. It is about eight centimeters in length, has a narrow neck, measuring three centimeters in diameter where it joins the bladder wall, and gradually expands as it passes out from this point, reaching its greatest diameter of nine centimeters a short distance from its free end. On its inner side, about its middle, a minute opening can be made out. This opening is circular and just about large enough to admit a pin point; it is situated in the center of a small area of dense fibrous tissue, and is evidently the lower opening of the left ureter. On opening the sac it is found to contain a thick greenish black purulent material similar to that already seen in the left ureter, and the index finger can be passed directly from the sac into the dilated ureter. Both the internal and external surfaces of the sac are covered with mucous membrane which shows patches of false membrane formation similar to those seen in the ureter and bladder. The sac wall appears to be of the same thick- ness throughout. Prom the normal site of the right lower ureteral orifice there projects a similar but much smaller sac three centimeters in length; it is not nearly so tense as the one on the other side. On the inner side of this second sac is an opening the size of a pin’s head, from which urine escapes; there is apparently no cicatricial tissue about this opening. The sac communi- cates freely with the left ureter. The prostate gland is slightly enlarged, but not sufficiently so to offer any obstruc- tion to the outflow of urine. The urethra is free from obstruction throughout its entire course. A microscopical examination of the sac wall shows that between the two layers of mucous membrane lies con- 3 nective tissue containing many bundles of unstriped muscle fiber. Remarks. This peculiar prolapse of the mucous membrane of the lower end of the ureter and that of the adjacent part of the bladder is not of common occurrence, although we find some similar cases on record. All of these cases seem to come under two main categories : 1. Those cases in which there is distinct evidence that the condition is due to congenital deformity. 2. Those cases in which the process has apparently resulted from some acquired abnormality of the genito-urinary tract. By far the larger number of cases present distinct evidence of congenital malformation; in fact, out of the thirteen cases which we have been able to collect, ten were evidently of con- genital origin, death occurring in five of these in the early years of childhood. All of these five cases occurred in female children, and in four of them, those of Davies-Colley, Caille, Beach, and Geerdts, there was not only a prolapse into the bladder, but the prolapsed sac actually passed through the urethra and appeared externally. In the congenital cases proving fatal at a later date, the deformity was in some instances less severe than in the cases ending fatally in early life; in other instances the deformity was just as great in the late as in the early cases, the previous escape of the individual perhaps being due to the fact that he had escaped genito-urinary infection, which seemed to have been the cause of death in the majority of the cases which succumbed early in life. The deformity in these congenital cases consisted in most instances of a partial or complete closure of the lower ureteral orifice. In one case another form of deformity is cited, viz. a ureter having a long por- tion of its course in the bladder wall, and for this reason sub- jected to an abnormal amount of pressure from the bladder musculature. Accompanying the deformity which was the actual cause of the condition, were often other evidences of congenital malformation. In several instances abnormalities of the kidney pelvis or double ureters were present, and one case is cited in which a deformity of the uterus was noted. 4 Of the cases in which there was no apparent congenital cause for the condition—and to this class we consider our case belongs—we could find but two examples, one reported by T. Smith, the other by Hutinel. Smith’s case, judging from his description and from an excellent plate which illustrates his article, was almost exactly similar to our own. In his case, however, urinary calculi were present on the right side in the prolapsed pouch, and on the left in the renal pelvis. In Hutinel’s case, which occurred in an old man, the sub- ject of cystitis, the pouching only involved the left ureter. At the time of death the lower orifice of the left ureter was not blocked, as the pouch communicated with the bladder by a pouch the size of a three-franc piece, but there was evidence of a former blocking in a much atrophied kidney on the affected side. Unfortunately Hutinel does not state whether the abnormally large opening which existed between the sac and the bladder was apparently due to simple dilatation or to an ulcerative process. Judging from the fact that in our case the abnormally small ureteral opening was contained in an area of cicatri- cial tissue, and from the history that the patient gave of a previous attack of acute cystitis, we are inclined to think that the blocking of the lower ureteral opening was due to an old inflammatory process with a subsequent formation of new tissue, which, in contracting, narrowed the ureteral orifice. It would seem likely that in the cases of Smith and Hutinel the same process might have taken place, as both patients showed evidence of old inflammatory disease of the genito- urinary tract. As far as the mechanism of the pouching is concerned the cases can again be divided into two classes, those in which there is a uniform dilatation from the pelvis of the kidney down to the end of the sac, and those in which the pelvis of the kidney and the main portion of the ureter are not dilated, the sacculation occurring only at the extreme lower end of the ureter. In the former class of cases, to which ours belongs, the pouching can be explained by a theory, the essence of which was advanced by Smith in reporting his case. He suggests 5 that the prolapse in these cases is due to the disproportion between the capacity of the ureter and kidney pelvis on the one hand, and the size of the lower ureteral orifice on the other. When, either from an extreme hydro-nephrosis or from an abnormal narrowing of the lower ureteral orifice, the urine is no longer able to escape from this orifice as fast as it is secreted, the distended ureter and kidney pelvis are com- pressed by the action of the abdominal muscles, particularly during urination and defecation, and a considerable downward pressure is brought to hear on the lower ureteral orifice.